It has been said that much that could have been done in many areas to prepare for the roll out of the ACA, but the belief on the right that 1) Republican candidate Mitt Romney would win the presidential election and strike down the health care plan, and 2) the Supreme Court would find the ACA unconstitutional delayed many from taking necessary action. It really doesn't surprise me that the Obama Administration elected to postpone the roll out of that element of ACA requirements. Moreover, like mentioned in NW30 cited commentary, the postponement allows for some sophistication and tweaking of requirements to improve clarity and streamline specific details.

Is this move an acknowledgment of Republican predictions of gloom and doom? Hardly, but keep on dreaming.

I think it's a riot that Obama is now so frightened of the most fundamental and essential requirement of the entire ACA -- that for it to work everyone must join -- that's he's postponing it until after the midterm election. That personifies cowardice, lack of conviction, desperation, political chicanery, deliberate deception of the more ignorant half of society, and the outright gamesmanship mentality of this entire administration.

Obama did not predict correctly that many GOP governors would fail to facilitate coverage to their constituents.
He did not really believe they would just let sick people die on their watch.
I read about this possibility back when the legislation was passed, so he was aware they might do that.
Lets hope the sick and the dead have big families who vote.

Did the Republicans force the clinics, hospitals and emergency rooms to shut their doors to all those without insurance or the ability to pay?

Or those with any government-backed health insurance, as MANY providers began several years ago? I began having to pay cash for some unique providers 4-5 years ago, and had to switch some providers when mine began refusing all my insurances ... Medicare, Mailhandlers, and TriCare. They saw the ACA coming and ran for cover.

The Obama administration will not penalize businesses that do not provide health insurance in 2014, the Treasury Department announced Tuesday.

Instead, it will delay enforcement of a major Affordable Care Act requirement that all employers with more than 50 employees provide coverage to their workers until 2015.

The administration said it would postpone the provision after hearing significant concerns from employers about the challenges of implementing it.

“We have heard concerns about the complexity of the requirements and the need for more time to implement them effectively,” Mark Mazur, Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, wrote in a late Tuesday blog post. “We recognize that the vast majority of businesses that will need to do this reporting already provide health insurance to their workers, and we want to make sure it is easy for others to do so.”

The Affordable Care Act requires all employers with more than 50 full-time workers provide health insurance or pay steep fines. That policy had raised concerns about companies downsizing their workforce or cutting workers’ hours in order to dodge the new mandate.

In delaying the enforcement of that rule, the White House sidesteps those challenges for one year. It is also the second significant interruption for the Affordable Care Act, following a one-year delay on key functions of the small business insurance marketplaces.

Together, the moves could draw criticism that the administration will not be able to put into effect its signature legislative accomplishment on schedule.

The Obama administration is postponing the ‘employer mandate’ – which would levy financial penalties on businesses with more than 50 employees that fail to provide health insurance that meet the minimum standards and “affordability” — until 2015. The move delays implementation of at least one component of the unpopular law until after the next mid-term elections. A coincidence, no doubt.

Individuals? You’re still on the hook.

From the Treasury Department statement:

Over the past several months, the Administration has been engaging in a dialogue with businesses – many of which already provide health coverage for their workers – about the new employer and insurer reporting requirements under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). We have heard concerns about the complexity of the requirements and the need for more time to implement them effectively. We recognize that the vast majority of businesses that will need to do this reporting already provide health insurance to their workers, and we want to make sure it is easy for others to do so. We have listened to your feedback. And we are taking action.

The press release from the administration is titled “Continuing to Implement the ACA in a Careful, Thoughtful Manner.” If comprehensive health care legislation had been passed in a careful, thoughtful manner we might have something a lot more constructive on our hands.

In any event, the decision prompts several questions.
Among them:
1 -Can the administration unilaterally decide when and how a law is implemented? If so, can Congress decide when and how to fund it?
2- Why is the employer mandate delayed but not the individual mandate?

3– Why is it that the populist Obama administration acts on complaints from large companies but fights all the way to the Supreme Court to levy fines on individuals?

It has been said that much that could have been done in many areas to prepare for the roll out of the ACA, but the belief on the right that 1) Republican candidate Mitt Romney would win the presidential election and strike down the health care plan, and 2) the Supreme Court would find the ACA unconstitutional delayed many from taking necessary action. It really doesn't surprise me that the Obama Administration elected to postpone the roll out of that element of ACA requirements. Moreover, like mentioned in NW30 cited commentary, the postponement allows for some sophistication and tweaking of requirements to improve clarity and streamline specific details.

Is this move an acknowledgment of Republican predictions of gloom and doom? Hardly, but keep on dreaming.

SWC

In my experience, you are spot on. Insurance companies were late in developing and adopting ACA compatible health plans. And, many of the providers I know were assuming that the ACA would be repealed and not making the changes to new coding and reimbursement systems. No one wants to retool and then have to backtrack. It is no surprise to me that this thing is delayed.

Rule making, like all human endeavor, is more complicated than we thought when we started. I've built structures, developed legislation, steered half billion dollar projects to construction. It was always more complicated than I thought it would be. Why would the ACA be any different--especially with the House doing everything they could to withhold funding for implementation?

Not that we didn't already know this before, but delaying the mandate for business ain't going to change the numbers.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
74% of small businesses will fire workers, cut hours under Obamacare
By PAUL BEDARD | JULY 16, 2013 AT 3:25 PM

Despite the administration's controversial decision to delay forcing companies to join Obamacare for a year, three-quarters of small businesses are still making plans to duck the costly law by firing workers, reducing hours of full-time staff, or shift many to part-time, according to a sobering survey released by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

"Small businesses expect the requirement to negatively impact their employees. Twenty-seven percent say they will cut hours to reduce full time employees, 24 percent will reduce hiring, and 23 percent plan to replace full time employees with part-time workers to avoid triggering the mandate," said the Chamber business survey provided to Secrets.

Under Obamacare, just 30 hours — not the nationally recognized 40 hours — is considered full-time. Companies with 50 full-time workers or more are required to provide health care, or pay a fine.

The administration recently decided to wait a year before businesses had to comply, but many are trying to get ready anyway. The president did not delay the mandate that Americans must have health insurance or pay a fine, however.

The Chamber's second quarter small business survey found that just 30 percent are ready for the law and even understand what is required.

Dealing with Obamacare is the biggest worry of small businesses and comes as they continue to see a sluggish economy which has already put a brake on their hiring. Just 17 percent reported adding employees in the past two years. And only one-in-five small business owners believe that they will add employees in the next two years.

The Chamber added that "nearly one-in-four employers say the health care bill is their biggest obstacle to hiring more employees."

Other key findings from the Chamber survey:

— 77 percent continue to think the U.S. economy is on the wrong track. However, small businesses are more optimistic about their local economy and individual business.

— The majority (61 percent) of small businesses do not have plans to hire next year.

— Concerns about regulation have increased significantly from 35 percent last quarter to 42 percent now.

Small businesses are looking for leadership on issues that will remove barriers and encourage growth.

— 88 percent of all small businesses support addressing entitlement spending to resolve America's growing financial challenges and escalating debt.

— 83 percent support congressional efforts to reform the tax code — with the majority focusing on making it less complex.

— 81 percent of small businesses surveyed believe the immigration system is broken and needs to be reformed.

— In contrast to the president's recent speech pushing new energy regulations, 90 percent of small businesses support easing EPA regulations and opening up more federal lands for drilling.

-----

Methodology/The Q2 U.S. Chamber of Commerce Small Business Outlook Survey was conducted online between June 21 - July 8 by Harris Interactive among 1,304 Small Business Executives (defined as executive level position in a company with fewer than 500 employees and annual revenue less than $25 M).

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou cannot download files in this forum